Friday, August 06, 2004
PHOTOS
I don't suppose the film photographers out there really have this option (that is, unless you're one of the few who keeps all of your photographs carefully logged and organized!)---but I did something yesterday which proved to be immensely helpful. In the pursuit of making a photo-contest entry, I went through all my travel photographs to see what I might have...
Somehow, doing this creates a "whole new eye." What I like for various OTHER reasons, often doesn't quite make it when I look at it from the new eye of a photo-contest judge: how clear is it? how compelling is it? does it create a question or tell a story by itself (not based upon other pictures in the same series)? what are the artistic elements? what technical problems are obvious?
Here's what I found: the photos I "like" the best aren't the best photos for a contest, not usually, anyway. Our "usual" eye excuses all kinds of common defects---which a photo judge would cast out in a millisecond. Many photos I took/take lack some cohesiveness---I'm looking for a better word--- as a "standalone" photo. Finally, while I've often preached that when you're looking at photos on a computer, there isn't much difference between a 1 and a 5 megapixel digital photo: this simply isn't true, when you start looking with that "new eye." Now, I'm wondering, whether the same might not be true between a 5 and a 13 megapixel camera?
I don't suppose the film photographers out there really have this option (that is, unless you're one of the few who keeps all of your photographs carefully logged and organized!)---but I did something yesterday which proved to be immensely helpful. In the pursuit of making a photo-contest entry, I went through all my travel photographs to see what I might have...
Somehow, doing this creates a "whole new eye." What I like for various OTHER reasons, often doesn't quite make it when I look at it from the new eye of a photo-contest judge: how clear is it? how compelling is it? does it create a question or tell a story by itself (not based upon other pictures in the same series)? what are the artistic elements? what technical problems are obvious?
Here's what I found: the photos I "like" the best aren't the best photos for a contest, not usually, anyway. Our "usual" eye excuses all kinds of common defects---which a photo judge would cast out in a millisecond. Many photos I took/take lack some cohesiveness---I'm looking for a better word--- as a "standalone" photo. Finally, while I've often preached that when you're looking at photos on a computer, there isn't much difference between a 1 and a 5 megapixel digital photo: this simply isn't true, when you start looking with that "new eye." Now, I'm wondering, whether the same might not be true between a 5 and a 13 megapixel camera?
